Courage not cowardice; balls not bluster

Quantum Quack: You are obviously in need of a tender. I am not, except in your execrable estimation.

Sheep and sheepdogs.

CptBork: No, that's not correct. You got your statistics from the place you got your learning disability, I assume? I said imminent, but I didn't say a thing about non-specific.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Toad said:
CptBork: No, that's not correct. You got your statistics from the place you got your learning disability, I assume? I said imminent, but I didn't say a thing about non-specific.
Click to expand...

Ok, suppose there were no specific imminent or foreseeable threats to your security. Suppose all the gangs had been cleaned out, there hadn't been a serious crime within 100 miles of your property for the last 10 years. Suppose the statistical chances of serious harm coming to you were less than the chances of Japan invading (and being successful at it). And as before, suppose it was proven beyond any rational doubt that the average citizen would be more than twice as safe from violent crime in a restricted gun society. Would that knowledge do anything to change your stance on gun laws?
 
They often say that dancing with a dance partner helps with the PTSD..
ever been dancing Dr_Toad?
Ever wanted to dance?
 
Last edited:
Dr_Toad said:
Quack, you're an asshole. You know it and rejoice in it. Congratulations for thinking you scored one.
Click to expand...
hee hee... what ever it takes Toad... what ever it takes...
Just think... there is a whole world out yonder that is boot scooting ... most of the time...
the foundations of empathy, societal cohesion etc... blah blah blah...
 
Mod Hat — (ahem!)

Yeah.

So, uh ... quite a show everyone's reportin' in, tonight, eh?

Y'all feel like reelin' back to something less than futile?

Thank'e.
 
Is that your attempt to mock my country roots or style of speech?

Don't take on something you can't understand.
 
Mod Hat — It's Northwest Amero, Baby!

Dr_Toad said:
Is that your attempt to mock my country roots or style of speech?
Click to expand...

I happen to come from a place with a heavy post-Norwegian influence, and we love hangin, with Canadians, eh.

Don't take on something you can't understand.
Click to expand...

Ya, sure, you betcha. Don't go where you don't know, lah.
 
iceaura said:
One problem the rest of us have with these hypothetical "respectable conservatives" is that they are never around when we need them.

Brian Kemp has been an idiot with no sense for an entire political career, including multiple elections to powerful office. That's because lots and lots of Republicans voted for him. He's currently running 2nd in the polls for Governor, with the frontrunner being the guy who threatened Delta Airlines with loss of tax benefits and other governmental revenge for refusing charity to the NRA. So he needed some pro-gun publicity.
Click to expand...

And then there are the people of Georgia.

When Georgia Republicans first voted in their gubernatorial primary in May, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle easily outpaced Secretary of State Brian Kemp, 39% to 26%. Since neither candidate in the multi-candidate field reached 50%, they advanced to a runoff, but given Cagle's tally from the first round of balloting, most expected the lieutenant governor to prevail.

That didn't quite work out. First a recording emerged of Cagle making some candid – and not altogether complimentary – comments about the GOP primary process. Then Donald Trump threw his support behind Kemp, defying the wishes of much of the Georgia Republican establishment. (Incumbent Republican Gov. Nathan Neal and the NRA supported Cagle.

As the dust settled last night, the results weren't close ....

.... With all of the precincts reporting, Kemp ended up winning by about 39 points, more than doubling Cagle's vote totals. It's very unusual to see a leading candidate perform much worse in a runoff than in a first-round primary, but Cagle, who'd never previously lost a contest in Georgia, went from 39% of the vote in May to 30.6% of the vote yesterday.

(Benen↱)​

It's also worth noting that Kemp is terrified of the woman he's running against; Benen notes Kilgore, explaining:

that Kemp “has a particular history with Abrams over her efforts to register previously untapped reservoirs of minority voters, and his supervision as Georgia's chief election official of aggressive voter purge initiatives that push the limits of federal and state laws and take advantage of weak Voting Rights Act enforcement by the courts and the Trump administration.”​

Respectability will be an interesting question in Georgia, as November draws nigh.
____________________

Notes:

Benen, Steve. "Georgians set the stage for an amazing gubernatorial race". msnbc. 25 July 2018. msnbc.com. 25 July 2018. https://on.msnbc.com/2v4KJne
 
Tiassa said:
.... With all of the precincts reporting, Kemp ended up winning by about 39 points, more than doubling Cagle's vote totals. It's very unusual to see a leading candidate perform much worse in a runoff than in a first-round primary, but Cagle, who'd never previously lost a contest in Georgia, went from 39% of the vote in May to 30.6% of the vote yesterday.
Click to expand...
There's another issue in Georgia, that is correlated with unusual and unexpected results in several places: Georgia's voting machines are sitting ducks for undetectable manipulation.
Their replacement by more secure setups has been repeatedly blocked, most recently by Georgia's Secretary of State just this year, on more or less comically spurious grounds. (https://www.ajc.com/news/opinion/op...BylGqekhN7L3cJ/?icmp=np_inform_variation-test ).

Georgia's Secretary Of State, the key administrative figure in preventing the replacement of Georgia's ridiculously vulnerable vote tally setup until after the upcoming elections, is Brian Kemp.
 
CptBork said:
Ok, suppose there were no specific imminent or foreseeable threats to your security. Suppose all the gangs had been cleaned out, there hadn't been a serious crime within 100 miles of your property for the last 10 years. Suppose the statistical chances of serious harm coming to you were less than the chances of Japan invading (and being successful at it). And as before, suppose it was proven beyond any rational doubt that the average citizen would be more than twice as safe from violent crime in a restricted gun society. Would that knowledge do anything to change your stance on gun laws?
Click to expand...

This sounds like a fantasy even more softcore than My Little Pony. Because even in My Little Pony there are giant monsters outside the city and in the forest. And the city gets regularly attacked by monsters.

But to humour you, in this fantasy world, that is nothing like the real world, should guns get banned? Yes and no. Because guns still serve for entertainment and recreational purposes. Without it, people would only have videogames and virtual reality arcades to go target shooting.
 
gamelord said:
This sounds like a fantasy even more softcore than My Little Pony. Because even in My Little Pony there are giant monsters outside the city and in the forest. And the city gets regularly attacked by monsters.

But to humour you, in this fantasy world, that is nothing like the real world, should guns get banned? Yes and no. Because guns still serve for entertainment and recreational purposes. Without it, people would only have videogames and virtual reality arcades to go target shooting.
Click to expand...

I was trying to find the extent to which Dr_Toad prioritizes his own personal well-being over the well-being of society as a whole. If he's willing to sacrifice thousands or millions of lives just so he can feel safer in rooms with doors, there's no point in trying to convince him that society would be safer with less guns.
 
Yep. I'm willing to "sacrifice" hundreds, if not maybe a thousand, to save myself and my family. I'd run out of ammunition by then, but so what? I'll have tried better than lying down and crying about the poor leftists who sucker-punch people in crowds. And don't get their goddamned teeth knocked out, get screws and plates, drink through a straw for 6 weeks and all... And after all, it was only a head wound! It wouldn't faze an idiot, so some animals really are more equal than others.

Take all the guns and there'd still be some smart people that can fashion lethal force weapons to defend themselves from fucking morons.

Choke on a chicken bone or something. Live up to your name, you fucking loser.
 
Dr_Toad said:
Yep. I'm willing to "sacrifice" hundreds, if not maybe a thousand, to save myself and my family. I'd run out of ammunition by then, but so what? I'll have tried better than lying down and crying about the poor leftists who sucker-punch people in crowds. And don't get their goddamned teeth knocked out, get screws and plates, drink through a straw for 6 weeks and all... And after all, it was only a head wound! It wouldn't faze an idiot, so some animals really are more equal than others.
Click to expand...

Did I say anything about not punishing someone for sucker punching you? I hate people who resort to violence to make their point because they don't have a real point to make, and I have no problem with seeing them locked up in isolated shitholes for lengthy periods of time. What does that have to do with shooting people who pose a threat to your life or long-term longevity, are you saying you need a gun to kill someone in case they punch you and don't get charged?

Dr_Toad said:
Take all the guns and there'd still be some smart people that can fashion lethal force weapons to defend themselves from fucking morons.
Click to expand...

And the weapons they fashion won't be any match for the ones designed and built in factories by large teams, nor will these kind of people be as prone to senseless violence compared to the uneducated yokels who currently buy cheap guns on the open market. Plus people will get arrested for building and selling illegal stuff, so don't expect an entire cottage industry to emerge out of this.

Dr_Toad said:
Choke on a chicken bone or something. Live up to your name, you fucking loser.
Click to expand...

Clearly you've got some serious self-control issues... err, I mean "demons" you need to deal with. Anyhow, I love you too, man.
 
Dr_Toad said:
Yep. I'm willing to "sacrifice" hundreds, if not maybe a thousand, to save myself and my family
Click to expand...
But you aren't willing to vote for sensible political representation. Killing people is on your table, voting is not.

In the standard four box scenario - soap, ballot, jury, and ammo - you have inverted the order necessary for defending a free society of equal human beings. The immediately likely, obvious, indicated factor in such an inversion would be cowardice. As the cowboy proverb has it: only pussies carry guns.

Or to put it another way: Save them from what?
Going spla with a firearm to save your family from "leftists" would require, at a minimum, the ability to identify leftists, after all. That means starting with soap, and moving to ballot.

Along the way, you might try washing out your mouth - handling the bluster factor and the cowardice simultaneously.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Toad said:
You're on ignore now, too.
Click to expand...

That's fine with me, you just take yourself out of the debate, I'll still be pointing out what a stupid backwater lunatic you are. Since you would have thousands of innocents sacrifice themselves for your personal sense of security, it just shows that your vote doesn't deserve to be counted or considered, and there will be no sympathy for you and your personal interpretation of the law when the gun control majority ultimately gets their way.
 
Bork. you're a moron. You can point out fictional crap all you want, all day long, and hope to collect your socialist paycheck on the back of people who haven't run out of money yet.

See how long that works in California, and wonder why it hasn't caught on in Texas.

Or just keep wondering while you spew bullshit.

Bye!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top